linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6 v2] PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and system sleep (v2)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20111102191432.GC29355@kroah.com>
Date:	Wed, 2 Nov 2011 12:14:32 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6 v2] PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and
 system sleep (v2)

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 03:54:20PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2011/6/29 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>:
> 
> > One of the roles of the PM core is to prevent different PM callbacks
> > executed for the same device object from racing with each other.
> > Unfortunately, after commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26
> > (PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend)
> > runtime PM callbacks may be executed concurrently with system
> > suspend/resume callbacks for the same device.
> (...)
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
> 
> A quick question: is there some specific reason why this patch should
> not go into the 3.0.y stable releases? We are trying to produce
> a runtime PM system of product quality based on 3.0.y and we've
> already had to backport this patch ourselves to get things stable.
> 
> We have also backported:
> PM: Introduce generic "noirq" callback routines for subsystems (v2)
> PM / Runtime: Update documentation of interactions with system sleep
> PM / Runtime: Add new helper function: pm_runtime_status_suspended()
> 
> And now it seems to be sufficient to get this thing going.

So, what specific git commits do you want to see in the 3.0-stable
tree, and in what order should they be applied in?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/